Billed as a vote of confidence in his leadership, the shareholder proposal to strip James Dimon of his role as chairman of the bank was shot down resoundingly Tuesday when just 32% of voting shareholders backed the measure.

As one observer on Twitter put it, talk about a “tempest in a teapot.”

Don’t be fooled. Dimon is less secure and has less room for error, even though this year’s tally came far below last year’s 40% figure on the same question.

J.P. Morgan declined to comment for this column.

For one, shareholders are pretty much a captive audience — and friendly to management. If you don’t like a company or its CEO, you usually don’t buy the stock. If you own the stock and don’t like how things are going, you can sell it.

There are some significant differences between this year’s vote and last year’s.

Most notably, J.P. Morgan worked hard to defeat the most recent referendum, aggressively lobbied the media and pressed on-the-fence shareholders hard. Bank officials kept early vote tallies close to the vest, irking sponsors of the resolutions.

Getty Images

Reporters were on Dimon’s case. Coverage played up the complaints of disgruntled shareholders and recited Dimon’s rocky year, ranging from bravado at economic conferences to bungled handling of the “London whale” trading mess to tin-eared comments about his wealth.

Dimon seemed to be openly concerned about his fate. He hinted that he might leave if he wasn’t allowed to keep the keys to the executive suite and boardroom.

Votes for individual directors reflected serious doubts about the makeup of the board. David Cote and Ellen Futter, both on J.P. Morgan’s risk-management committee, got less than 60% of the vote to be re-elected.

Cote, head of industrial conglomerate Honeywell International, and Ms. Futter, president of the American Museum of Natural History, were singled out by proxy recommendation firm Institutional Shareholder Services for “no” votes.

ISS recommended more “seasoned” directors with financial expertise. Shareholders re-elected them with an unusually small majority.

Yes, J.P. Morgan won, but remember the rote nature of almost all shareholder votes on boards of directors–and the “best in class” governance Dimon claims for J.P. Morgan. Other J.P. Morgan directors got 95% or more of the vote Tuesday.

There seemed to be a genuine sense of relief after the vote tallies were announced in Tampa, Fla.

Dimon issued a statement that suggested the effort to unseat him as chairman got his attention. “We appreciate the support shown by shareholders and the thoughtful way many have engaged with us as they determined how to vote on these issues,” he said. “We take the feedback from shareholders very seriously and we will continue to build toward being best in class in corporate governance.”

Dimon’s virtuosity was on display at the meeting: compassionate with a shareholder stung by auction-rate securities–and dismissive with a shareholder worried about the bank’s reputation in the Libor interest-rate rigging scandal.

Love him or hate him, though, it wasn’t Dimon or his personality that carried the day. It was the bank’s performance under his leadership.

As I pointed out last week, J.P. Morgan’s share price is up more than 25% since he became CEO. In comparison, the KBW Bank Index is down 43% Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc. are down 71% and 90%, respectively.

That’s the easiest way to summarize why Dimon survived this challenge. Money is why investors are willing to live with the missteps of mortgage settlements, congressional criticism, botched trades in the Chief Investment Office and so on.

Shareholders don’t necessarily have to like how J.P. Morgan pulls off higher profits and a rising stock price, just that the bank keeps on doing it.